Zoe Y S Chan1, Janet H Zhang1, Ivan P H Au1, Winko W An2, Gary L K Shum3, Gabriel Y F Ng1, Roy T H Cheung1. 1. Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong. 2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 3. Faculty of Sport & Health Sciences, University of St Mark & St John, Plymouth, UK.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The increasing popularity of distance running has been accompanied by an increase in running-related injuries, such that up to 85% of novice runners incur an injury in a given year. Previous studies have used a gait retraining program to successfully lower impact loading, which has been associated with many running ailments. However, softer footfalls may not necessarily prevent running injury. PURPOSE: To examine vertical loading rates before and after a gait retraining program and assess the effectiveness of the program in reducing the occurrence of running-related injury across a 12-month observation period. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 320 novice runners from the local running club completed this study. All the participants underwent a baseline running biomechanics evaluation on an instrumented treadmill with their usual running shoes at 8 and 12 km/h. Participants were then randomly assigned to either the gait retraining group or the control group. In the gait retraining group (n = 166), participants received 2 weeks of gait retraining with real-time visual feedback. In the control group (n = 154), participants received treadmill running exercise but without visual feedback on their performance. The training time was identical between the 2 groups. Participants' running mechanics were reassessed after the training, and their 12-month posttraining injury profiles were tracked by use of an online surveillance platform. RESULTS: A significant reduction was found in the vertical loading rates at both testing speeds in the gait retraining group ( P < .001, Cohen's d > 0.99), whereas the loading rates were either similar or slightly increased in the control group after training ( P = .001 to 0.461, Cohen's d = 0.03 to -0.14). At 12-month follow-up, the occurrence of running-related musculoskeletal injury was 16% and 38% in the gait retraining and control groups, respectively. The hazard ratio between gait retraining and control groups was 0.38 (95% CI, 0.25-0.59), indicating a 62% lower injury risk in gait-retrained runners compared with controls. CONCLUSION: A 2-week gait retraining program is effective in lowering impact loading in novice runners. More important, the occurrence of injury is 62% lower after 2 weeks of running gait modification. Registration: HKUCTR-1996 (University of Hong Kong Clinical Trials Registry).
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The increasing popularity of distance running has been accompanied by an increase in running-related injuries, such that up to 85% of novice runners incur an injury in a given year. Previous studies have used a gait retraining program to successfully lower impact loading, which has been associated with many running ailments. However, softer footfalls may not necessarily prevent running injury. PURPOSE: To examine vertical loading rates before and after a gait retraining program and assess the effectiveness of the program in reducing the occurrence of running-related injury across a 12-month observation period. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 320 novice runners from the local running club completed this study. All the participants underwent a baseline running biomechanics evaluation on an instrumented treadmill with their usual running shoes at 8 and 12 km/h. Participants were then randomly assigned to either the gait retraining group or the control group. In the gait retraining group (n = 166), participants received 2 weeks of gait retraining with real-time visual feedback. In the control group (n = 154), participants received treadmill running exercise but without visual feedback on their performance. The training time was identical between the 2 groups. Participants' running mechanics were reassessed after the training, and their 12-month posttraining injury profiles were tracked by use of an online surveillance platform. RESULTS: A significant reduction was found in the vertical loading rates at both testing speeds in the gait retraining group ( P < .001, Cohen's d > 0.99), whereas the loading rates were either similar or slightly increased in the control group after training ( P = .001 to 0.461, Cohen's d = 0.03 to -0.14). At 12-month follow-up, the occurrence of running-related musculoskeletal injury was 16% and 38% in the gait retraining and control groups, respectively. The hazard ratio between gait retraining and control groups was 0.38 (95% CI, 0.25-0.59), indicating a 62% lower injury risk in gait-retrained runners compared with controls. CONCLUSION: A 2-week gait retraining program is effective in lowering impact loading in novice runners. More important, the occurrence of injury is 62% lower after 2 weeks of running gait modification. Registration: HKUCTR-1996 (University of Hong Kong Clinical Trials Registry).
Authors: Bradley J Bowser; Rebecca Fellin; Clare E Milner; Michael B Pohl; Irene S Davis Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Matthew C Hess; David I Swedler; Christine S Collins; Brent A Ponce; Eugene W Brabston Journal: J Athl Train Date: 2020-01-02 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: José Roberto de Souza Júnior; Pedro Henrique Reis Rabelo; Thiago Vilela Lemos; Jean-Francois Esculier; João Pedro da Silva Carto; João Paulo Chieregato Matheus Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-05-12 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Elizabeth A Schmida; Christa M Wille; Mikel R Stiffler-Joachim; Stephanie A Kliethermes; Bryan C Heiderscheit Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2022-03-22
Authors: Tryntsje Fokkema; Robert-Jan de Vos; Edwin Visser; Patrick Krastman; John IJzerman; Bart W Koes; Jan A N Verhaar; Sita M A Bierma-Zeinstra; Marienke van Middelkoop Journal: BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med Date: 2020-06-16
Authors: Erin E Futrell; K Douglas Gross; Darcy Reisman; David R Mullineaux; Irene S Davis Journal: J Sport Health Sci Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 7.179